Summary of Representations Made to Local Plan Issues and Options Consultation (2019)

Summary of representations made to Local Plan Issues and Options consultation (2019)

Contents Introduction ...... 2 Scale of Growth and Locational Strategy ...... 2 Housing Growth Options ...... 4 Employment Growth Options ...... 5 Locational Strategy Options ...... 6 Strategic Greenfield Designations Options ...... 10 Health and Well-being ...... 11 Open Space, Sport and Recreation Options ...... 12 Healthy Communities Options ...... 13 Housing Need ...... 14 Affordable Housing Options ...... 15 Housing Mix Options ...... 16 Housing for an ageing population and specialist needs options ...... 17 Planning for Gypsies and Travellers Options ...... 18 Environment and Sustainability ...... 19 Design Policy Options ...... 20 Historic Environment Options ...... 21 Natural Environment Options ...... 22 Climate Change and Flooding Options ...... 23 Economy, retail and leisure ...... 24 Employment Mix Options ...... 25 Retail Options...... 26 Leisure and Tourism Options ...... 27 Transport ...... 28 Transport Options ...... 29 Local Services and Infrastructure ...... 31 Infrastructure Options ...... 32

Introduction

1. This document sets out a summary of the representations made to the Local Plan Issues and Options consultation that Blaby District Council undertook between June and September 2019. The Local Plan Issues and Options consultation (2019) invited views on whether or not the Council identified the relevant issues facing the District and whether any of the potential policy options are the most appropriate for addressing the identified issues.

Scale of Growth and Locational Strategy

Question 1: What start and end dates do you think are the most appropriate for the Local Plan?

• Agree with requirements of the NPPF: Strategic policies should look ahead over a minimum 15 year period from adoption and respond to long term requirements and opportunities such as those arising from major improvements in infrastructure. • Policies in local plans should be reviewed at least once every five years. • PPG indicates that strategic policy-making authorities will need to calculate their local housing need figure at the start of the plan-making process. • A longer timescale, up to 2050, to reflect the Strategic Growth Plan and to plan for strategic scale sites and infrastructure. • The start and end dates of Local Plans in the Housing Market Area should be aligned to assist with planning for cross boundary matters and evidence gathering. • The proposed timescale for preparing the Local Plan is unrealistic. • The uncertainties around the housing numbers and strategic infrastructure should be confirmed before the Local Plan is progressed.

Question 2: Scale of Growth and Locational Strategy - Do you agree with the issues identified? Are there any other issues that should be considered?

Question 2

Issue 1: The population of the District, and wider housing market area, is continuing to grow and new households require housing as a result.

Issue 2: A suitable amount of additional employment land will need to be provided to ensure that it supports the local economy and future housing growth.

Issue 3: The plan must identify sustainable locations for housing, employment and other new development.

• 38 agree with the issues • 2 disagreed with the issues

• Other issues were promoted

Scale of Growth and Locational Strategy Issues Raised

Issue 1 (Population growth) • Recognise that existing households may also require a different type of housing. • Refer to changes in household demographics such as the ageing population and growth in private sector renting. • Specifically refer to responding to Leicester’s unmet housing need.

Issue 2 (Employment growth) • Disagree. The District has no employment problems and allocating more land for employment will encourage commuting and commercial traffic. • Recognise and give support to sub-regional and regional employment needs. • Major employers in the District attract employees from outside the area and the District’s residents travel outside the area for work. • Avoid an emphasis on warehousing / logistics and focus on skilled jobs to support local communities. • Trends in retailing and manufacturing will influence the need for the logistics sector. • Recognise the different locational requirements of different industrial and logistics sectors. • Regenerate existing employment sites.

Issue 3 (Locations for growth) • A clear definition of what is meant by ‘sustainable’ is requested. • Protect existing communities and settlements from growth and pursue the ‘garden villages’ concept. • A different spatial strategy is required including strategic growth locations.

New issues (Scale and Location) • Ensure there is sufficient, viable and timely delivery of infrastructure to support new development and the opportunities provided by new strategic infrastructure to foster additional growth • There are deficiencies in existing areas (of what) • Cumulative impacts of development on local roads, services and air quality • Mitigating and adapting to climate change • High quality open spaces are essential for quality of life • Significant need to improve public transport to enable development to be sustainable • Population increases will require more youth facilities to be provided. • Design of new development should complement the built and natural environment • Better access and connections are required between communities • The need to work in partnership with neighbouring councils and Leicester and Leicestershire Economic Partnership to deliver the Strategic Growth Plan’s ambitions. • The effects of Brexit on housing and business.

Housing Growth Options

Question 3

Option A: Continue with existing level of housing growth beyond 2029.

Option B: Use the standard methodology for calculating local housing need.

Option C: Use the standard methodology and provide for a share of the unmet need (towards the end of the Plan period).

Question 3: Housing Growth options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 4 support option A • 10 support option B • 28 support option C • Other issues were promoted

Housing Growth Issues Raised • The standard methodology is the starting point for calculating local housing need. The PPG highlights the factors to be considered in terms of increasing the housing requirement. The following were highlighted: • Reflecting the economic ambitions and planned strategic infrastructure improvements as set out in the Strategic Growth Plan • Accommodating a share of the unmet need from Leicester City as agreed through a statement of common ground • Considering past levels of housing delivery. • Blaby should plan to meet local housing need and should not consider meeting the unmet needs of Leicester until this is suitably evidenced, confirmed and distributed through statement of common ground that has been consulted on. • The unmet need from Leicester must be accommodated evenly over the plan period rather than back loaded to the end. • Include a contingency so that the growth strategy can be pursued with a degree of flexibility. • Any housing requirement figure should be expressed as a minimum.

Employment Growth Options

Question 4

Option A: Plan for the employment requirements specified within the 2017 Leicester and Leicestershire Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessment (HEDNA).

Option B: Work with neighbouring authorities to meet the different types of employment requirements across a wider area (and update the joint evidence base where required).

Option C: Support employment growth above identified needs.

Question 4: Employment Growth options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 6 support option A • 24 support option B • 13 support option C • Other issues were promoted

Employment Growth Issues Raised • Employment should be located within strategic growth locations. • Blaby DC needs to work with its neighbours and accommodate some growth strategically. • Blaby has advantages in terms of access to the motorway network and is attractive to the market. It is within the ‘Golden Triangle’ for logistics development. • Blaby District should not be the preferred ‘overspill’ area for Leicester City. • The Blaby Local Plan should not be based on the Strategic Growth Plan (SGP). • Employment land should be guided by the SGP. • Cross boundary working should maintain the areas competitive advantage. • The local plan needs to meet a variety of employment types in addition to warehouses. • The Local Plan should be ambitious and provide employment above identified needs. • The Local Plan should not provide above needs as the area already has low unemployment. • The strategy should acknowledge the size and range of facilities in each settlement. The spatial strategy should align with the settlement hierarchy. • Realistic timescale will need to be provided for strategic sites. • The employment strategy should not restrict sites in rural areas. • The evidence base for employment needs updating and assumptions need to be clear. • High skilled and well paid jobs should be created and not warehousing jobs. • Employment at Whetstone Pastures is reliant on motorway junction improvements and the A46 expressway and should be reviewed. • Strategic sites will increase CO2 emissions.

• The policy needs to respond to changing working patterns including improved IT for home working. • Employment growth needs to be matched by the type of housing provided. • The Local Plan should identify ‘reserve’ employment sites. • New strategic sites should exploit opportunities to deliver new infrastructure including transport. • Strategic Employment Sites should be allocated adjacent to the Urban Area of Leicester. These are the most accessible locations and would not destroy the beauty and character.

Locational Strategy Options

Question 5

Option A: Continue with existing policy approach for the locational strategy.

Option B: Extended Leicester PUA focus.

Option C: Spread the distribution of growth.

Option D: Infrastructure led development at strategic sites / garden villages.

Option E: Single New Standalone Settlement.

Question 5: Locational Strategy options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 17 support option A • 15 support option B • 14 support option C • 23 support option D • 10 support option E • 23 responses suggest a hybrid approach which includes more than one option. • Other issues were promoted

Locational Strategy Issues Raised

General • The locational strategy should not be confirmed until there is certainty provided in terms of the housing requirement, on the funding and delivery of strategic infrastructure and on the definition of sustainable. • The alternative options, including a hybrid option, should be fully tested and evaluated before a preferred approach is included in the Local Plan • To ensure a continual supply of housing from a range of deliverable and developable sites varying in size, location and nature (including self build) will be needed. Delivery of housing should not be reliant on a small number of sites.

• The supply of sites should provide a five year housing land supply and to meet the Housing Delivery Test. It is suggested that a contingency, say 20%, to respond to delays and rapid change is included. • Reduce the impact of employment sites on the Strategic Road Network and ensure its efficient use by placing employment sites close to residential areas and locations with access to public transport. • The use of brownfield sites and windfall sites for development should be maximised. Reference is made to ensuring that Leicester City has clearly considered this approach before determining its level of unmet need. • Must consider the impact of the growth strategy and site allocations on neighbouring authorities in terms of traffic and the natural and built environment as well as other relevant factors.

Options A and B • The current strategy, the PUA focus, may not deliver enough housing and so an alternative locational strategy to deliver growth in sustainable locations is needed. • It is logical to provide new homes in the PUA or other settlements with strong links to Leicester where housing is needed in terms of unmet need from Leicester. • New housing in urban areas is likely to have a lesser impact on the Strategic Road Network than in rural locations due to reduced trips and availability of local services and facilities. • Development, for employment, around the PUA and key transport routes such as the M1 corridor must remain a key element of the locational strategy. • The distribution of housing should be based an a settlement hierarchy that has been determined by an assessment the sustainability of a settlement and its capacity.

Option C • Need to ensure that supporting infrastructure is delivered with growth. For many villages in Blaby District the infrastructure (local roads, health services, schools and green space) is at capacity. A different approach to the existing strategy must be pursued. • Development should be sited away from existing settlements.

Option D • Option D is reliant on strategic infrastructure such as the proposed A46 expressway and greater certainty is required before support is given to this locational strategy option. A suggested alternative route and growth strategy (to the West of Leicester) is proposed. • Strategic Sites and new settlements are complicated to deliver and require long lead- in times due to land assembly, infrastructure funding and provision. It must be supplemented with sites elsewhere that can be delivered in the short and medium term. The balance between the options will depend on timing of infrastructure for the strategic growth locations. • The approach of infrastructure-led development of strategic sites / garden villages needs to be refined and evidence provided to ensure that sustainable growth is delivered. Consider infrastructure relationships with other settlements and transport movements including public transport.

• Strategic sites / new settlements must be located in sustainable locations and be of a size (5000+ dwellings) to provide high levels of self sufficiency for day to day services and facilities and offer public transport to higher order centres and employment. • Whetstone Pastures garden village gives an alternative to the existing locational strategy that will lead to loss of settlement identity, pressure on infrastructure and place less urban expansion. A garden village approach could increase housing delivery, achieve a higher standard of design and provide physical and social infrastructure.

Option E • There is no single location in the District that could meet the growth requirements.

Strategic development • The Issues and Options document does not identify any specific development proposals but a number of comments have been made raising concerns about a number of potential strategic scale proposals including: Whetstone Pastures Garden Village, Strategic Development Area at Stoney Stanton and Hinckley National Rail Freight Interchange. The main concerns are: • Uncertainties relating to the housing requirement, • Uncertainties about the delivery of strategic infrastructure including Junction 20A and A46 expressway. A suggested alternative route, to the west of Leicester, for the A46 is proposed. • The impact on local roads (particularly if there is partial delivery of strategic road infrastructure), social infrastructure, the environment and air and noise pollution. • The cumulative impact of the proposals around Sapcote and Stoney Stanton. A holistic approach is required to plan and mitigate for such large scale development. • The sustainability of the proposals particularly given the heightened awareness of climate change. • Lack of information.

Promoted Sites The following sites are specifically promoted through the consultation (but others have been promoted through the ‘call for sites’): • Glebe Farm, Blaby (Hallam Land Management Ltd) • Land at Lutterworth Road, Blaby (Davidsons Developments Ltd) • Land at Hospital Lane, Blaby (Leicestershire County Council) Peter Brett Associates • Land at Broughton Road, Cosby (Bloor Homes Ltd) Marrons • Land north of Countesthorpe Road, Cosby (Gladman Developments Ltd) • Land east of Narborough Road, Cosby (Catesby Estates) • Land south of Cosby Road, Countesthorpe (Redrow Homes Ltd) Marrons • Land at Leicester Road and Foston Road, Countesthorpe (Catesby Estates) • Land at Leicester Road, Countesthorpe (Leicestershire County Council) • Land off Peatling Road, Countesthorpe (Gladman Developments Ltd) • Land at Willoughby Road / Glebe Farm, Countesthorpe (Davidsons Developments Ltd)

• Whetstone Pastures garden village (Tritax Symmetry) • Land south of Countesthorpe and Broughton Astley near proposed J20a M1 (Parker Strategic Land) • Land close to proposed A46 in Harborough District (B and M Coates) • Land between railway / Leicester Road and north of Burbage Common Road, Elmesthorpe (Tritax Symmetry) • Land north of Blaby Road, Enderby (Avant Homes) Marrons • Land north of Glenfield / south of A50 Groby Road (Wilson Bowden Developments) • Land at Blood’s Hill, Kirby Muxloe (Bloor Homes Ltd) Define • Land at Blood’s Hill, Kirby Muxloe (Holmcroft Ltd) • Land at Farley Way, Kirby Muxloe (Holmcroft Ltd) • Land south of Ratby Lane, Kirby Muxloe (Massarella Family Partnership) Nineteen47 Ltd • Land north of Hinckley Road, Kirby Muxloe (L and Q Estates Ltd) Pegasus Group • Land at Kingstand Golf Course, Hinckley Road, Leicester Forest East (Linden Strategic Land) • Land off Oak Road, Littlethorpe (Gladman Developments Ltd) • Land at Warwick Road / Cosby Road, Littlethorpe (Davidsons Developments Ltd) • Land between Beggars Lane and Desford Road to extend Lubbesthorpe SUE (Hallam Land Management and the Drummond Estate) • Dovecote Court, Potters Marston (Dovecote Court Business Centre) • Land at proposed HNRFI, Sapcote (Tritax Symmetry) • Land south of Hinckley Road, Sapcote (Hallam Land Management Ltd) • Land west of Sapcote and Stoney Stanton to form part of a Strategic Development Area (Leicestershire County Council) • Land at J2 of M69 (Parker Strategic Land) • Land at Stoney Stanton (Gent Family) • Land at Huncote Road, Stoney Stanton (2 sites) (Bellway Homes) • Land off Middleton Close, Stoney Stanton (Tansey Estate) • Land south of Whetstone for a garden suburb (Miller Homes)

Strategic Greenfield Designations Options

Question 6 Option A: Continue with existing approach to retain the designations. Option B: Consider whether or not to retain the designations.

Question 6: Greenfield Designations options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 26 support option A • 13 support option B • Other issues were promoted

Greenfield Designations Issues Raised • The principle of reviewing the concept of strategic greenfield designations and amending the extent of the boundaries are different. • The current designations are popular, understandable and well established mechanisms to manage settlement growth for the Plan period. The designations: • Protect settlement boundaries, characteristics and identity. • Shape urban growth by retaining a zone of open countryside around local towns. • Gives certainty to local residents about their environment and a commitment to prevent merging of villages. • But necessary to review to consider the suitability of the designations going forward and to ensure that such policy designations are not a constraint to meeting development needs. A review of strategic greenfield designations will allow the Local Plan to consider the most sustainable locations for which may currently be restricted by Green Wedge etc. • It is not compliant with national policy to impose ‘blanket’ protection policies to restrict, for example, development in Countryside. Recently adopted plans elsewhere take a more flexible approach to edge of settlement development to allow for changing circumstances. • A robust assessment is required to justify retaining Green Wedges (and other strategic greenfield designations) and/or amend their boundaries. • Green Wedges are a cross boundary strategic matters and require discussion between relevant neighbouring authorities. • Consider impacts on the historic environment when reviewing detailed boundaries. • Minimum areas of separation between villages and new garden villages should be designated with development restrictions.

Health and Well-being

Question 7

Issue 4: The District has some of the highest sports participation rates in the County. However, it ranks poorly in terms of both the quality and quantity of facilities.

Issue 5: The residents of Blaby District are heavily reliant on private cars to travel to work and leisure. Walk and ride connections between key work, leisure and residential sites could be improved.

Issue 6: Obesity is an increasing problem nationally and excess weight in adults within Blaby District is significantly worse than the England average.

Issue 7: Pockets of the District suffer from poor air quality, predominantly from vehicle emissions.

Question 7: Health and Well-being - Do you agree with the issues identified? Are there any other issues that should be considered?

• 25 agree with the issues • 2 disagreed with Issue 4 • Other issues were promoted

Health and Well-being Issues Raised • New strategic developments should be planned to encourage healthy lifestyles. • Access to the countryside should be promoted and is an important aspect of developing policies for Green Infrastructure. • A greater emphasis and a cohesive plan should be developed to provide safe walking and cycling. • Planning policies should include community use of school facilities. • Reduce the need to travel (by car) through better location of services and facilities and co-location of jobs. • Careful consideration should be given to the proximity of existing industrial infrastructure when determining where to locate new residential buildings, and visa versa. • A co-ordinated approach to meeting the health and well being needs of the District is supported. • Blaby does not rank poorly in quality and quantity of all sports facilities as Issue 4 suggests. • All developments should be required to provide an off-road route that gives non- motorised road users an alternative access. • Sport England’s Active Design guidance, Manual for Streets and Building for Life 12 principles and guidance should be adopted. • Fosse Park area should be made more appealing for walking and cycling. • Easy access to local greenspace is valuable for good health and well-being.

• Large developments will have a massive impact through loss of greenfield land and increased traffic pollution and noise. • The issue of poor air quality must be addressed. • More reliable and affordable public transport is needed.

Open Space, Sport and Recreation Options

Question 8

Option A: Continue with the existing approach and update the evidence base.

Option B: Do not set out specific standards and instead require provision to be delivered in line with the Council’s most up-to-date evidence.

Option C: Set out additional development criteria for new development.

Question 8: Open Space, Sport and Recreation options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 16 agree with option A (some multiple options) • 15 agree with option B (some multiple options) • 13 agree with option C (some multiple options)

Open Space, Sport and Recreation Issues Raised • Guidance for strategic developments should include design criteria to ensure facilities are accessible and well located. • Connecting spaces is important for biodiversity as well as walking and cycling routes. • The plan should be based upon up-to-date and robust evidence of need. • The plan should set out clear triggers for the provision of specific on-site open space typologies. • Specific open space standards will help to inform policy requirements for contributions from developments. • The historic environment has key links with open space and wellbeing. • This should not be limited to parks and pitches, but also look at linear routes that can encourage healthy activity and provide wildlife corridors. • Clear demonstration of how developer contributions will be calculated in relation to priorities identified, is essential. • A community and wider locality approach, rather than individual sites, should be take to secure a comprehensive solution to overall needs. • Walking and cycling links should be improved to help reduce the reliance on motor vehicles. • All previously identified green spaces should be protected. • Open spaces can perform multiple operations, including flood resilience and surface water management.

Healthy Communities Options

Question 9

Option A: Continue with the existing approach and update the evidence base

Option B: Consider setting out a specific policy which relates to healthy communities.

Option C: Consider the use of a specific policy which looks to improve walking and cycling connections.

Question 9: Healthy Communities options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 11 agree with option A (some multiple options) • 16 agree with option B (some multiple options) • 21 agree with option C (some multiple options)

Healthy Communities Issues Raised • It is important that criteria are set in policies. • Support policies to deter hot-food takeaways close to schools. • Health Impact Assessments can help to provide a framework and assessment for healthy communities. • Improvements to walking and cycling are support and should not stop at district boundaries. • The District’s canal network offers leisure and recreational opportunities. Additional links to canals should therefore be provided. • Information regarding the purpose and effectiveness of requiring Health Impact Assessments is needed. • Health Impact Assessments can be a tick-box exercise and unnecessary if clear requirements are set out within planning policy on design, open space, infrastructure etc. • The Sustainability Appraisal supporting the Local Plan will assess the most appropriate policy options for healthy communities. A separate policy is not considered necessary. • Connections should be multi-user so that they are open to walkers, riders and cyclists. • It is essential that physical activity is ‘designed-in’ to people’s lives through delivery of infrastructure which makes walking and cycling a direct, convenient and safe option. • Principles from Building for Life 12, Sports England’s Active Design and Manual for Streets should be adopted. • Requirements to submit a Health Impact Assessment mean that health considerations are explicitly considered at an early stage and can positively influence development. • Any new walking and cycling infrastructure and routes would need to be cohesive extensions to the network.

• Health Impact Assessments should be extended to include proposals for employment developments

Housing Need

Question 10

Issue 8: There is a lack of affordable housing to meet local needs, partly due to house prices increasing faster than incomes.

Issue 9: Different sectors of the community have different housing needs in terms of type and size.

Issue 10: There is an increasing pressure within the District to provide suitable accommodation for older people (including dementia friendly, life-long homes and bungalows).

Issue 11: There is a need to further understand the requirements for Gypsy and Traveller and Travelling Show People who meet the definition for planning purposes.

Question 10: Housing Need - Do you agree with the issues identified? Are there any other issues that should be considered?

• 23 agree with the issues • 1 disagreed with the issues • Other issues were promoted

Housing Need Issues Raised • Refer to lack of affordable starter homes, to buy or rent, for young people. • Reflect the need for affordable housing types for the older population. • Add a new issue on managing the location and growth of houses in multiple occupation. • Expand Issue 10 to include other forms of specialist housing such as self build or private rented accommodation. • Affordable housing needs to be affordable to all income groups. • The supply of affordable housing is affected by a number of factors and not just the level of house prices.

Affordable Housing Options

Question 11 Option A: Continue with the existing approach.

Option B: Modify the policy approach in terms of the threshold for and percentage of affordable housing.

Option C: Allocate sites specifically for affordable housing.

Option D: Provide higher levels of housing overall.

Question 11: Affordable Housing options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 20 agree with option A • 10 agree with option B • 6 agree with option C • 10 agree with option D • Other issues were promoted

Affordable Housing Issues Raised • The amount of affordable housing a scheme can provide depends on the overall viability of a project and a flexible approach is needed to take account of the circumstances of individual schemes. • The approach should be justified by up to date evidence of need and viability tested. Deliverability should not be compromised by over ambitious requirements. • Identify the areas where affordable housing is most needed and take a flexible approach driven by lower thresholds where need is greatest. • A broad range of mechanisms should be promoted and enshrined in policy to provide certainty about what type of affordable housing is required. • Consider the requirement for 10% affordable home ownership and entry level exception sites. • The need for affordable housing may be affected by making provision for Leicester’s unmet need. • Applying a lower threshold or seeking a higher percentage may limit the number of smaller windfall sites coming forward and so impact on housing delivery. • Concerns were raised about whether funding would be available to support allocating specific sites for affordable housing.

Housing Mix Options

Question 12 Option A: Continue with the existing approach.

Option B: Use a prescriptive policy approach.

Option C: Allow the market to determine the mix of type and size of housing.

Question 12: Housing Mix options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 32 agree with option A • 7 agree with option B • 17 agree with option C • Other issues were promoted

Housing Mix Issues Raised • Combining the existing approach based on up to date evidence alongside market knowledge will deliver the best opportunities for housing mix. • A market led approach will lead to a disproportionate proportion of 4 and 5 bed homes. • A flexible policy approach is needed to respond to site size, location and character as well as local market conditions and changing circumstances over time. • Housing mix, including viability, should be tested through the Local Plan process and at project scheme level. Market led approaches take account of viability. • Up to date evidence on housing mix and the needs of specific groups, prepared on a joint basis, is required. • HEDNA 2017 needs to be updated. The housing mix data is a district wide figure and should not be used as a blueprint to be sought on each site. • A prescriptive approach would provide certainty to developers and residents. • No evidence that space provision is sub standard in new dwellings and so the inclusion of space standards is not justified. • A proactive approach to providing land for self and custom build plots is required by allocating sites and requiring large sites to deliver a percentage of units as serviced self build plots. • Strategic scale sites can support self and custom build plots and other forms of housing tenure innovation. • A blanket requirement for self build and custom plots should be avoided as it does not take account of evidence of need and / or suitability of sites.

Housing for an ageing population and specialist needs options

Question 13 Option A: Maintain the current policy approach.

Option B: Develop a higher policy requirement for the provision of accessible and adaptable homes.

Option C: Include policy requirements for other house types which are suitable for older people and others with specialist needs.

Option D: Consider allocating sites specifically for older persons and other specialist housing.

Question 13: Housing Mix options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 9 agree with option A (some multiple options) • 13 agree with option B (some multiple options) • 14 agree with option C (some multiple options) • 6 agree with option D (some multiple options) • Other issues were promoted

Housing for an ageing population and specialist needs Issues Raised • Policies for older persons and specialist housing, including the optional technical housing standards, should be based on evidence of need and tested for viability. • A variety of approaches with a level of flexibility should be taken to provide choice for individuals to stay in their own home. • Opportunities for sites for older persons housing / specialist housing could be identified in masterplans for strategic sites but there must be a mechanism to allow for alternative development where demand is not expressed. • Consider the role of private led assisted living accommodation. • Site allocations should satisfy criteria such as proximity of sites to public transport, local services and facilities, health services and town centres. • Site allocations have the potential to create ghettos for older and disabled people. • Ensure that provision for older people and other specialist housing is made within existing as well as new settlements. • Discourage bungalows due to inefficient use of land.

Planning for Gypsies and Travellers Options

Question 14 Option A: Continue with the existing approach.

Option B: Allocating sites.

Question 14: Planning for Gypsies and Travellers options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 17 agree with option A • 7 agree with option B • Other issues were promoted

Planning for Gypsies and Travellers Issues Raised • Update evidence on a joint cross border basis for gypsies and travellers to identify the need for accommodation including transit sites and to inform policy / the need for site allocations. • When updating the assessment of need, it is necessary to take account of the changing circumstances relating to those meeting the definition for planning purposes. The most recent assessment was unrealistically low and resulted in under provision. • The criteria based policy should be reviewed to ensure that the criteria are appropriate and allow for sites to come forward and be acceptable. • There should be a number of smaller sites distributed around the County rather than concentrating provision in certain locations such as Aston Firs.

Environment and Sustainability

Question 15 Issue 12: There is a critical need to help adapt to and mitigate the growing impacts of Climate Change and actively take steps to help promote lower carbon forms of development.

Issue 13: New developments needs to be appropriately designed so it contributes to, and does not detract from, the local character and distinctiveness of the District.

Issue 14: The Council’s policy approach towards conserving the District’s historic and cultural assets needs to be appropriate and up to date.

Issue 15: There is a limited amount of brownfield land suitable for development. Pressure for development may mean loss of currently undeveloped land/countryside.

Issue 16: Additional growth needs to ensure that it is located in the most suitable locations with regards to the District’s natural landscapes.

Question 15: Environment and Sustainability Issues - Do you agree with the issues identified? Are there any other issues that should be considered?

• 27 agree with the issues • 6 disagreed with Issue 15 • Other issues were promoted

Environment and Sustainability Issues Raised • Standards on energy efficiency and low carbon energy provision need to be applied across the housing market area. • Local authorities should set performance criteria to ensure that measures are achieved equally. • Reliable and affordable public transport needs to be expanded. • Better walking and cycling connections are needed. • Consideration is needs to be given to the cross-boundary impacts of development. • A comprehensive audit of brownfield sites needs to be undertaken. • Reference needs to be made to flood risk and drought, both of which are recognised as growing impacts of climate change. • Additional growth needs to ensure that it is located sensitively with regards to biodiversity. • Water quality and water resources need to be mentioned as issues. • A commitment to Biodiversity Net Gain is needed. • Issue 15 needs to be balanced against potential damage to countryside and landscape / wildlife habitats. • Protecting and enhancing biodiversity should be given the same emphasis as addressing climate change and achieving sustainable development. • Some brownfield sites can be more important for wildlife than some intensively farmed agricultural land.

• Planning needs to contribute to the protection and enhancement of the natural, built and historic environment. • Green Infrastructure and resilient ecological networks play an important role in aiding climate change adaptation. • The Local Plan should set criteria based policies to ensure the protection of designated biodiversity and geological sites. • The Local Plan should be screened under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations at an early stage. • We would expect the plan to address the impacts of air quality on the natural environment. • The plan should set out a strategic approach for the creation, protection, enhancement and management of networks of biodiversity. • A key principle to maintaining ecological networks is enabling free movement and dispersal of wildlife. • The Local Plan should give appropriate weight to the roles performed by the area’s soils. • The plan should safeguard the long term capability of best and most versatile agricultural land. • The Plan will need to contain policies which protect habitats from water related impacts.

Design Policy Options

Question 16

Option A: Continue with the existing approach.

Option B: Consider setting out a more detailed approach to design policy.

Option C: Consider the use of a design specific Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).

Question 16: Design options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 18 agree with option A (some multiple options) • 12 agree with option B (some multiple options) • 20 agree with option C (some multiple options) • Other issues were promoted

Design option Issues Raised • The SPD provides a more detailed framework to guide development and set project specific objectives and requirements. • The SPD should be prepared in conjunction with the site promoters to ensure it can be delivered. • Options B and C are not justified and overly restrictive.

• The current local plan approach to design is adequate. • Biodiversity Net Gain and open space should be included in any design policy requirements. • Sustainable construction should be considered. • A commitment to the adoption of master planning principles for strategic sites is important. • A prescriptive design policy could impact upon viability. • The development of master plans and or SPD can be used to confirm site details needed to enable earlier investment in infrastructure. • Active Design principles should be included. • New homes should be designed and built using the most up to date and efficient energy options. • Requirements should be applied to all development proposals (not just major schemes).

Historic Environment Options

Question 17

Option A: Continue with the existing approach.

Option B: Consider setting out a more detailed approach.

Question 17: Historic Environment options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 14 agree with option A • 14 agree with option B • Other issues were promoted

Historic Environment Issues Raised • The current policy approach reflects the requirements of the NPPF. • The historic landscape can be a cross border consideration. • The current policy approach is satisfactory but could be developed further to assist with identifying assets worthy of protection for heritage reasons. • Green designations should consider the historic environment if they are to be reviewed. • A more detailed approach, specific to the area and locality, protecting and complementing the existing environment. • There should be protection to ancient/historic farmland.

Natural Environment Options

Question 18

Option A: Continue with the existing approach.

Option B: Consider mapping all components of local wildlife-rich and wider ecological networks.

Question 18: Natural Environment options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 14 agree with option A • 14 agree with option B • Other issues were promoted

Natural Environment Issues Raised • Option B would benefit all aspects of biodiversity as it will allow a better understanding of designated sites. • Healthy populations of protected species may also be present outside of designated sites. These should also be mapped. • What would the results of the mapping exercise be used for? • Greater regard needs to be given to flood risk. • Mapping natural assets would be a useful first step to consider how any S106 could be used to deliver biodiversity net gain, and where the likely opportunities are. • Ancient Woodland is an irreplaceable habitat which needs to be protected. • Cross boundary impacts of any emerging proposals need to be considered. • Option B is the only approach that would comply with the NPPF and objectives under the Government’s 25 year plan. • Brownfield sites can be very important for wildlife, in some cases, more so than greenfield sites. • Option B would help the LPA to deliver the required biodiversity net-gain from the planning process. • Option B would provide an overly restrictive policy approach and one that may stifle opportunities for investment. • Allowing a flexible approach to how sites are developed will ensure that sites are maximised and that viable and suitable sites don’t become undevelopable. • Neither of the options will deliver what is required to contribute to biodiversity net gain. An SPD would help developers to do this. • The use of greenfield sites should be minimised. • There is a significant conflict between developing large scale greenfield sites and the protection of the natural environment and its various habitats.

Climate Change and Flooding Options

Question 19

Option A: Update current policy to enhance sustainable design principles and the efficient use of natural resources.

Option B: Consider setting a requirement for sites (of a certain size) to provide a percentage of their energy requirements through onsite renewable / low carbon energy generation sources.

Option C: Consider the use of a Supplementary Planning Document to provide more detailed guidance for sustainable development/design.

Question 19: Climate Change and Flooding options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 15 agree with option A (some multiple options) • 10 agree with option B (some multiple options) • 16 agree with option C (some multiple options) • 1 disagree with all options • Other issues were promoted

Climate Change and Flooding Issues Raised • Policies must be consistent with national guidance, applied across the housing market area, and subject to viability testing. • SPDs for individual strategic sites can consider the potential for specific onsite measures. • All options are considered to be inconsistent with national policy and guidance. • The 3 options should be combined to give a comprehensive approach. • It is not considered appropriate to establish a blanket requirement for on-site renewable / low carbon energy sources. • Cutting edge sustainable design principles should be promoted. • A percentage requirement is too prescriptive and not achievable on all sites. A more flexible approach would be supported. • All new developments should provide resilience to all sources of flooding. • The planting of new floodplain woodland can help to reduce diffuse pollution, protect river morphology, aid flood risk management and meet biodiversity targets. • The Council should not set different targets or policies outside of Building Regulations. • The use of an SPD to provide more detailed guidance for sustainable development/design is supported. • To achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 most new buildings need to be carbon neutral. • There needs to be significantly increased efforts to protect and enhance biodiversity. • Building regulations provide a consistent set of implementable standards and a mechanism for monitoring. • Air pollution needs to be addressed.

• Surface water should be managed in line with the Government’s Future Water strategy. • Good quality river water and groundwater is vital for provision of good quality drinking water. • Option B should be expanded to sites all sizes.

Economy, retail and leisure

Question 20

Issue 17: Some existing employment sites are under pressure for re-development for non- employment uses.

Issue 18: Blaby Town Centre and other retail centres require policy support to ensure that they maintain their vitality and viability.

Question 20: Economy, retail and leisure - Do you agree with the issues identified? Are there any other issues that should be considered?

• 13 agree with the issues • 1 agreed conditionally • Other issues were promoted

Economy, retail and leisure Issues Raised • Existing employment sites need assessing to consider whether employment is the best long term use. • Retail core areas should be protected from other uses but reflect the realities of change. • Retail uses that provide for local needs should be protected. • Policies should assist Small and Medium size enterprises. • There should be a flexible approach to rural employment. • Further employment issues will emerge over the plan period so it should be flexible. • Employment sites should not be in residential areas. • Fosse Park has had a negative effect on local centres. • There is less of a need for stores on the high street. • Growth in internet purchasing has changed the high street. • Conversion of shops back to residential or other uses should be encouraged. • The developments proposed in the district will provide low skilled and low paid jobs. • There is also a very high employment rate in the district. • Future development need to attract high skilled and high paid workers. • Employment sites should be protected where they can realistically provide employment. • Employment sites may change to non-employment purposes because they have outlived their suitability. • Employment sites have to change as businesses and commerce changes.

• Allocated employment sites should be available for residential use in sustainable locations where not taken up.

Employment Mix Options

Question 21

Option A: Continue with the existing policy approach.

Option B: Consider a policy which distinguishes between different types of employment sites (including strategic-scale B8 uses).

Option C: Update evidence base and allocate a range of employment sites to meet (local and regional) demands.

Question 21: Employment mix options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 2 agree with option A • 6 agree with option B (some multiple options) • 16 agree with option C (some multiple options) • Other issues were promoted

Employment Mix Issues Raised • The changing nature of employment activity, technology advances and automation and the varying needs of businesses make the planning of employment land complex. • Office uses should be provided on strategic scale sites rather than restricting offices to certain locations. • A range of sites need to be provided in terms of size, type and location. • The need for large logistics sites is questioned. • A garden village and logistics park will encourage commuting. • Large logistics parks will result in loss of landscape, increased noise, congestion and pollution and employ few people for their size. • A diverse range of sites is required including small sites and specialised sites. • Policies could distinguish between different types of employment sites. • Dovecote Court (Potters Marston) should be identified as an employment site. • The employment evidence base should be updated. • Employment allocations should take account of heritage assets. • Large Scale logistics parks need to be planned on a county / regional basis. The Local Plan should focus on allocations for small and medium sized businesses. • Houses should be co-located with employment. • Different types of employment have different locational requirements. • High paying employment should be sought, not warehousing. • There is not an available workforce to support large scale logistics employment.

Retail Options

Question 22

Option A: Continue with the existing policy approach and update the Council’s evidence base where necessary.

Option B: Consider amending the existing policy approach to allow for a greater level of flexibility of uses within Blaby Town Centre and Neighbourhood Parades.

Question 22: Retail Options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 8 agree with option A • 10 agree with option B • Other issues were promoted

Retail Issues Raised • The existing retail function of settlements needs to be preserved. • Policies should promote Blaby Town centre. • Policies should recognise changes to retailing and give more flexibility to allow residential, leisure and employment opportunities in town centres. • A new retail study should take account of the proposed housing distribution. • Retail policy should not be relaxed as it allows less desirable uses. • Primary frontages should be retained for retail use. More flexibility should be allowed in secondary frontages. • A strong policy steer is required for Fosse Park. • Fosse Park will become overstretched in time as a result of increased internet shopping. • Retail issues are wider than what can be controlled through planning and development. A holistic approach is needed. • Changing trends in retail need to be balanced against the need to keep town centres vibrant. • Retail policies should be more flexible. • Redevelopment of town centres should encourage residential development.

Leisure and Tourism Options

Question 23

Option A: Continue with the existing policy approach

Option B: Consider the use of a specific tourism related policy

Question 23: Leisure and Tourism Options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 10 agree with option A • 13 agree with option B • 4 agree with options A and B • Other issues were promoted

Leisure and Tourism Issues Raised • Locations with tourism potential could be identified. • Potential links between tourism and Green Infrastructure and waterways should be considered. • Links between tourism and the historic environment should be explored. • The need for additional tourism related development is questioned. • The tourism potential of town centres should be explored. • Tourist sites should be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport and should be sustainable. • Joint working with other districts should be pursued. • The leisure plan needs to be updated and links to tourism explored.

Transport

Question 24

Issue 19: Some two-thirds of the working population of the District travel to work using a car or van. This is substantially above the national and County average.

Issue 20: There are five Air Quality Management Areas within the District which have mainly been designated as a result of vehicle emissions.

Issue 21: Over-reliance on car use will continue in new developments unless they are located in areas that have a wider choice of transport options to access a wide range of services and facilities.

Issue 22: Some junctions and road links within the District are operating at or above capacity, with limited scope for further improvements.

Issue 23: The Birmingham to Peterborough railway line runs through the District via Narborough Station. The benefits of this connection should be maximised.

Question 24: Do you agree with the issues identified? Are there any other issues that should be considered?

• 16 agree with the issues • 2 agree with some of the issues. • Other issues were promoted

Key Transport Issues Raised • Strategic growth areas must relate well to existing road and rail infrastructure or new infrastructure. • Strategic growth areas should be self-sufficient and offer public transport. • Strategic Growth areas offer opportunities for residents to live close to employment. High quality internet connections will promote home working. • Strategic Growth will worsen existing traffic problems. • Development around the PUA delivers best opportunity for sustainable transport. • A new train station should be built to support strategic growth. • A transport strategy is needed to support growth proposals including sustainable transport (public, cycling and walking) and roads. • Other transport issues include: provision of reliable and affordable public transport; need for strategic transport planning; Transport impact of strategic developments; connections between communities. • There is inadequate public transport. • Narborough Station needs to be maximised but there are transport issues of congestion and delays. • Disused railway lines should be used for walking and cycling. • Motorway and Strategic Road Network need improvement to avoid the need for A46 Expressway. • The existing local and strategic road network is at capacity at times.

• Alternatives to the A46 Expressway need to be explored. • There are air quality issues associated with road use. • There are issues around the A5 that need addressing.

Transport Options

Question 25

Option A: Continue with existing policy approach.

Option B: Promote policies that actively encourage sustainable transport.

Option C: Promote policies that actively discourage use of private cars.

Option D: Promote improved technology and traffic management to address congestion, delays and air quality.

Option E: Allow for development and accept that junctions and links will continue to operate above capacity.

Question 25: Transport policy options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 14 support option A (some multiple) • 19 support option B (some multiple) • 11 support option C (some multiple) • 11 support option D (some multiple) • 2 support option E (with other options) • Most chose multiple options rather than a single option

Transport Policy Issues Raised • A thorough strategic transport plan should be developed coordinating sustainable transport, public transport, walking and cycling options. • Radial routes to Leicester City Centre should be improved as well as the A46 expressway. • High quality public transport routes should not be impeded. • The plan should not rely on technology improvements to solve transport problems. • Policies should differentiate between transport requirements of smaller sites and large strategic sites. • Cars have an important role and policies should not discourage car use (especially in rural areas). • Larger proposals are likely to require capacity mitigation and safety schemes for the strategic road network. • The Hinckley NRFI may require further mitigation schemes for the strategic road network.

• There are likely to be impacts on the Strategic Road Network that will need to be mitigated. Evidence will be required regarding potential impacts. • More sustainable forms of transport should be encouraged. • A new junction on the M1 could have knock-on effects for the local road network. • An alternative A46 expressway should be considered. • A new settlement at Whetstone Pastures will overwhelm the transport network and will not minimise car journeys. • The A46 would pass through some of the most attractive areas of countryside in Leicestershire. • There have been increasing traffic problems in some villages including congestion, delays and speeding. • The HNRFI development will worsen traffic on local roads. • A new train station should be provided east of Hinckley. • Junction improvements should be sought to free up traffic and improve air quality. • Strategic Growth Plan development should provide transport improvements. • Dispersing development to smaller villages could help reduce pressure on main routes and junctions. • Whetstone Pastures will address the policy options of encouraging sustainable transport, discouraging private car use and using improved technology. • Cumulative transport impacts need to be assessed. • Transport is the main issue facing the Local Plan. • Option E (allowing the network to operate above capacity) is not acceptable.

Local Services and Infrastructure

Question 26

Issue 19: Some two-thirds of the working population of the District travel to work using a car or van. This is substantially above the national and County average.

Issue 20: There are five Air Quality Management Areas within the District which have mainly been designated as a result of vehicle emissions.

Issue 21: Over-reliance on car use will continue in new developments unless they are located in areas that have a wider choice of transport options to access a wide range of services and facilities.

Issue 22: Some junctions and road links within the District are operating at or above capacity, with limited scope for further improvements.

Issue 23: The Birmingham to Peterborough railway line runs through the District via Narborough Station. The benefits of this connection should be maximised.

Question 26: Local Services and Infrastructure - Do you agree with the issues identified? Are there any other issues that should be considered?

• 18 agree with the issues • No disagreement identified

Infrastructure Issues Raised • Strategic sites much deliver appropriate infrastructure and community facilities. • Infrastructure should be certain, delivered in a timely and viable manner and ongoing management. • Co-ordination of a number of agencies is required. • New development requires new capacity in terms of schools and health care. This should be provided by developers through contributions. • Infrastructure requirements will need to be tested for viability. • There is a need for local energy generation and charging points for vehicles to support the move to low carbon. • There are currently infrastructure constraints in schools, Doctors etc. but also Green Infrastructure, waste transfer and energy. • Adequate sewerage infrastructure should be in place to transfer and treat any increase in waste water. • Ad hoc expansion of rural villages should provide adequate transport improvements. • Planning permission should only be granted where additional capacity has been provided. • Infrastructure should be demonstrably deliverable before allocation and should be in place before first use on any development. • CIL should be used to pay for development.

Infrastructure Options

Question 27

Option A: Continue with existing policy approach.

Option B: Prioritise infrastructure based on viability.

Option C: Only allow development where there is demonstrable capacity or certainty of delivery of infrastructure such as schools / health services etc.

Question 27: Infrastructure policy options - Which of the above option(s) do you think should be pursued? Are there any other options to consider?

• 18 support option A (some multiple) • 9 support option B (some multiple) • 18 support option C (some multiple)

Infrastructure Policy Raised Issues • Strategic projects should support the range of necessary infrastructure and be viable. • The selected sites must demonstrate that provision of facilities is viable and deliverable. • The key issue is the extent to which individual schemes can contribute to strategic transport infrastructure. • Other funding sources should be considered such as Government loans and grants. • Development should only be allowed where infrastructure is available. Infrastructure should be provided before development. • Strategic co-ordination of necessary infrastructure is required across the HMA and must be coordinated with the delivery of new housing and employment. • Cross boundary implications need to be considered in terms utilities, water and waste. • The ad hoc expansion of rural villages will not deliver the necessary infrastructure. • Better internet access and speeds are required. • Sewage capacity needs to be properly assessed. Development in the rural areas is likely to have a greater impact. • The infrastructure needs of residents must be understood. • A strategy based on existing capacity could prevent some more sustainable settlements from being considered. • A Community Infrastructure Levy should be introduced.